Government Actions on Climate Change: Promises and Shortcomings

When world leaders gathered in Paris in 2015, they made a historic promise to limit global warming to well below 2°C, ideally to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Nearly a decade later, the question remains: are governments delivering on their climate commitments, or are these pledges just empty words? While the Paris Agreement created a framework for climate action, the gap between promises and actual progress continues to widen.

COP and the Paris Agreement: Progress or stagnation? 🔗

The Paris Agreement works through five-year cycles where countries submit updated climate action plans called Nationally Determined Contributions. In 2023, the first global stocktake revealed both progress and alarming shortfalls. According to recent analysis, policies in place before 2015 would have led the planet toward a catastrophic 4°C warming by 2100. Current pledges have reduced this projection to approximately 2.6°C by 2100, though this still overshoots the agreement’s goals.

The stocktake showed that while expected temperature rise has decreased from 3.7-4.8°C in 2010 to 2.4-2.6°C at COP27, the world remains far from the 1.5°C target. Perhaps most concerning, global emissions continued rising after the Paris Agreement was signed rather than falling. The year 2024 was the hottest on record, with temperatures rising more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, and emissions must peak by 2025 to stay within safe limits.

Climate finance has emerged as a major sticking point in negotiations. Developed countries pledged to mobilize $100 billion annually by 2020 to support developing nations, but this goal wasn’t met until 2023. The recently established Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage has received only $768 million in pledges from 27 countries as of March 2025, a fraction of what’s needed to address climate impacts in vulnerable nations.

India’s climate pledges: Ambitious or underwhelming? 🔗

India updated its Nationally Determined Contribution in 2022 with several key commitments for 2030. The country pledged to reduce its emissions intensity by 45% from 2005 levels, achieve 50% of installed electricity capacity from non-fossil sources, and create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes through forests and tree cover.

Meeting targets ahead of schedule 🔗

India has shown notable progress on renewable energy. The country reached its 50% non-fossil capacity target five years early and now ranks fourth globally in cumulative renewable energy capacity. By the end of 2024, over 43% of India’s total electricity capacity came from non-fossil sources. Investment in renewable energy projects surged by over 91% between 2023 and 2024, with rooftop solar installations doubling in fiscal year 2023-24.

The coal contradiction 🔗

However, these achievements mask a troubling reality. Despite progress in renewable capacity, coal still accounts for around 75% of electricity generation. The country hit record coal production of one billion tonnes in fiscal year 2024-25 and continues building new coal plants. The Climate Action Tracker rates India’s climate targets and policies as highly insufficient, indicating they lead to rising rather than falling emissions.

The emissions intensity target, while technically on track, could have been more ambitious. Analysis suggests India might meet this goal well before 2030, raising questions about whether the target pushes the country hard enough toward decarbonization. Furthermore, while India emphasizes that achieving its targets requires international financial support, current policies already exceed the 50% non-fossil capacity goal without such assistance.

The net zero dilemma: Too little, too late? 🔗

At COP26 in 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that India would achieve net zero emissions by 2070. This target is two decades beyond what scientists say is needed to avoid catastrophic climate impacts, and 10 years later than China’s 2060 pledge.

A global patchwork of promises 🔗

The United States and European Union aim for net zero by 2050, while China targets 2060. These varying timelines reflect different levels of development, historical responsibility, and economic capacity. India argues that it represents 17% of the world’s population but contributes only 5% of global emissions, and that developed nations with higher historical emissions should lead the way.

The announcement sparked mixed reactions. Some climate experts welcomed India’s commitment as significantly more ambitious than its previous plans, while others criticized the timeline as inadequate. The World Resources Institute India noted the pledges were more ambitious than current climate plans, but meeting them would require substantial additional investments and supporting policies.

The implementation challenge 🔗

Research shows that achieving net zero by 2070 would require India’s total installed solar power capacity to exceed 5,600 gigawatts. Coal use for power generation would need to drop by 99% by 2060, and crude oil consumption would need to peak by 2050 and fall 90% between 2050 and 2070. These transformations demand an estimated $10.1 trillion in investment beginning immediately.

A recent survey of energy executives revealed growing skepticism about net zero timelines. In 2024, 44% of industry leaders predicted the world wouldn’t achieve net zero until 2070 or later, up from just 32% the previous year. These experts, who are responsible for building the infrastructure needed for the transition, cite extraordinary challenges in scaling renewable energy, upgrading transmission networks, and managing the transition.

Local vs. global: The need for stronger climate policies 🔗

While international agreements struggle with implementation, many cities are taking climate action into their own hands. Cities generate 75% of all greenhouse gas emissions and house the majority of the world’s population, making them critical actors in climate solutions.

Heat action plans show local innovation 🔗

Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other weather-related disaster, yet it’s still not recognized as a disaster under federal law. Cities aren’t waiting for national action. In India, Ahmedabad developed an early warning system capable of issuing alerts seven days before a heat wave, which combined with policy changes has reduced heat-related deaths by around 20%.

The Cool Cities Accelerator, launched in November 2025, brought together 33 cities representing over 145 million people to tackle extreme heat. Cities like Athens appointed Chief Heat Officers, while others are implementing cool roofs, tree planting initiatives, and resilience hubs in vulnerable neighborhoods. These practical interventions deliver immediate benefits to residents while national governments continue debating long-term targets.

Cities outpacing national commitments 🔗

At COP30, a strong majority of submitted NDCs mentioned cities and local actors as key levers for climate action, up 19% from the previous round. The Coalition for High Ambition Multilevel Partnerships, endorsed by 77 countries and the European Union, recognizes that working with local governments is crucial to delivering national climate goals.

Local climate action plans show how abstract goals translate into measurable work. Cities can respond to climate change in ways that are localized to their region, economy, and capacity. They’re implementing green infrastructure, expanding public transportation, creating climate-resilient housing, and protecting vulnerable populations through targeted interventions. These actions demonstrate that effective climate policy doesn’t require waiting for global consensus.

The contrast between local action and global pledges reveals a fundamental tension in climate governance. While cities deploy cooling centers, plant trees, and retrofit buildings, national governments struggle to meet emissions targets set years ago. International agreements provide essential frameworks and financing mechanisms, but real progress often happens when mayors, city planners, and community organizations take matters into their own hands.

What do you think? Can local climate initiatives bridge the gap left by slow international progress? Should countries face consequences for missing their climate pledges, or do voluntary targets remain the only viable path forward in a world of sovereign nations?

References

1. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/paris-agreement
2. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements
3. https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/ten-years-of-the-paris-agreement
4. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1847812
5. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/india/
6. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/1/modi-india-to-hit-net-zero-climate-target-by-2070
7. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/09/net-zero-challenges-india-target/
8. https://time.com/7305946/cities-tackling-extreme-heat/